The Ideology of Takfīri-Jihādist Khārijism in the Words of Its Pioneers, Ideologues and LeadersPosted by Abu Iyaad on Friday, October, 14 2016 and
filed under Doctrines

The Emergence of the Khārijites and the Basic Elements of their Revolutionary Ideology

The leader of all Khārijite movements, a man known as Dhul-Khuwayṣarah, challenged the integrity of the Prophet (sallallāhu ʿalayhi wasallam) and accused him of social injustice and not judging by what Allāh revealed (of justice) in the matter of distribution of wealth. He claimed that he and those with him had not received a portion and that this was injustice. The Prophet (sallallāhu ʿalayhi wasallam) informed his Companions that there are others with this man and they will shortly come out against the Muslim nation and referred to them as renegades (Khārijites). He prophesied that they will kill ʿUthmān, the third caliph, will revolt against ʿAlī, his cousin who became the fourth caliph, who will fight and defeat them, and that they will continue to plague the Muslim nation.

From the Prophetic traditions describing them: “They pass through the religion (Islām) like an arrow passes through its prey” and “Their faith does not pass beyond their throats” and “They recite the Qurʾān but it does not go beyond their collar-bones” (indicating ignorance and false scholarship) and “They speak with the best speech of the creation” (meaning, beautified, alluring speech) “(They are) young of age, foolish of mind” and “Their speech is beautiful, alluring yet their actions are evil” and “They are the most evil of the creation” and “They call to the Book of Allāh, yet they have nothing to do with it” and “They are the most evil of those killed beneath the canopy of the sky” and “Glad tidings for the one who killed them” and “If I was to reach them, I would slaughter them, like the slaughtering of Ād (a destroyed nation of the past)” meaning, every last one of them until none of them remain. “They will not cease to emerge, being cut off each time, until the Anti-Christ (Dajjāl) appears amongst their armies” and “They are the Dogs of Hellfire” and more.

These groups appeared as prophesied within a few decades. They revolted against ʿUthmān on grounds of social injustice and claimed he was not judging by Allāh’s law but by personal interests. Later, they revolted against ʿAlī on similar grounds, claiming he had granted the right of judgement to men, thereby committing shirk (associationism). They treated what was not a sin and what were permitted ijtihāds (jurisprudential decisions) in matters of politics and governance to comprise disbelief on account of their ignorance. When they appeared and met new circumstances, they began to lay down the foundations of their doctrines, all based upon their own interpretations, following ambiguous passages of the Qurʾān whose meanings they did not understand.

From their core principles: Takfīr on account of what is not a sin (legislatively permitted act, a permitted ijtihād or a forgiven, unintended error) or what is a blameworthy sin. Claiming that the lands of Islām have become lands of disbelief (dār kufr) because of the apostasy of the rulers. Obligating people to emigrate to them. Making loyalty and disloyalty to be centered around the rulers and takfīr of them. Testing Muslims through the doctrine of takfīr of the rulers as a means of validating their faith. Considering their activities to be ‘jihād’ and ‘enjoining good and prohibiting evil’ and using these slogans to deceive the young, ignorant and naive. Considering jihād against the rulers and Muslims who are not with them as the greatest of obligations and as an actualization of the declaration of faith. Their slogans were the verses, “Judgement belongs to none but Allāh.” (12:40) and “Whoever does not judge by what Allāh revealed are the disbelievers.” (5:44). They split into numerous sects, varying in their extremism and horrendous deeds.

The unifying central core idea amongst all of them was the issue of ḥākimiyyah (judgement by Allāh's law), sulṭah (political authority) and the necessity of revolting against the rulers. The Prophet informed his nation that they will witness and encounter the self-indulgence and selfishness of the rulers who will come after and that they must show patience and not revolt, despite their tyranny and injustice. This is to maintain the greater, wider benefit to society, to harbour a lesser evil in order to avoid greater evil. In contrast, he ordered with the killing of the Khārijites, despite their beautified slogan and plentiful signs of overt piety, which was itself founded upon ignorance, extremism and exaggeration. The affair of the Khārijites became well known and their doctrines and activities were written in the books of creed for all posterity. However, at times and places when ignorance appears in Muslim societies, these doctrines can start to take shape if the right circumstances are present.

It should be noted that the Khārijite ideology, Khārijite movements and politically-charged interpretations of Islām are the perfect medium for external foes and enemies who have their own goals and designs to penetrate, support (economically or militarily), direct, lead, and bolster such movements to help further their own agendas. The Khārijites are therefore most harmful to Islām and the Muslims in more ways than one. One should also note the striking similarities between Marxist, Communist movements and their slogans (toppling of monarchies, tyranny of capital, social justice) and the basis upon which Khārijites frame their doctrines and activities.

Developmental Framework of 20th Century Khārijite Ideology

Both Abu al-Aʿlā al-Mawdūdī and Sayyid Quṭb - the latter being strongly influenced by the former’s writings - gave a narrow, political explanation of the basic declaration of Islām, (lā ilāha illallāh). They gave the word ilāh (deity) a meaning centred almost exclusively around the concept of “lawgiver” (ḥākimiyyah) and “political authority” (sulṭah), thereby opposing what was well known and established with the scholars of the Ahl al-Sunnah, past and present including Ibn Taymiyyah, Ibn al-Qayyim, Ibn ʿAbd al-Wahhāb and others.

Built upon this distortion, they considered all contemporary Muslim rulers (perceived and presented as “lawgivers” and wielders of political authority) to have usurped divine authority and essentially declared them polytheists and apostates. Because of oppression (ẓulm), self-indulgence (istiʾthār), and disadvantaging the subjects for their own benefit, the rulers were considered to have not judged by justice, and not judging by justice means to have abandoned judging by Allāh's law. The stories of the Prophets and Messengers in the Qurʾān were then misinterpreted as being nothing but revolutions against despotic tyrants who had usurped divine authority by becoming lawgivers. The goal of the Prophets was distorted and presented as struggling to dismantle the thrones of the tyrants and re-establishing genuine political authority whose primary goal is to establish “social justice”.

Thus, establishing political authority became the primary goal in this ideology. This required Islām and the matter of Tawḥīd to be focused around: Takfīr of the Muslim rulers, disbelieving in these rulers (kufr bil-ṭāghūt), declaring disloyalty (barāʾ) for them, striving to remove them and establishing a legitimate Muslim authority (khilāfah, imāmah) which returns political authority (ḥākimiyyah, sulṭah) to Allāh that had been formerly ‘snatched’ and ‘usurped’ by the rulers. Their chants and slogans incorporated the verses, “Judgement belongs to none but Allāh.” (12:40) and “Whoever does not judge by what Allāh revealed are the disbelievers.” (5:44).

Jihād and enjoining good and prohibiting evil were then reframed as the struggle against apostate regimes (ṭawāghīt) in order to establish this narrow, restricted, politically-interpreted understanding of Tawḥīd. Because of the alleged absence of a legitimate Muslim political authority, a genuine Muslim state or society no longer existed - all lands inhabited by Muslims were lands of disbelief (dār kufr), and thus the greatest obligation was to create a genuine Muslim state and to bring about a jamāʿah, an ummah, that had long been “absent” (al-ummah al-ghāībah).

From here, developing a new body of jurisprudence was embarked upon so that the proponents of this ideology who saw themselves as the only “true believers” could determine how to behave with these apostate rulers, government institutions (army, police) and employees and the societies of pre-Islāmic disbelief (jāhiliyyah) residing in lands of disbelief (dār kufr) - all of which are referred to collectively as “the near enemy”. The entire body of jurisprudence written within this context and which relates to jihad, enjoining good and prohibiting evil and loyalty and disloyalty is thus, built upon ignorance and distortion, is contextually invalid and has no basis in the writings of the well-known scholars such as Imam Aḥmad, Ibn Taymiyyah, Ibn al-Qayyim, Ibn ʿAbd al-Wahhāb. Rather, this doctrine is a merger between European materialist philosophy (Marxist, Communist revolution) and the doctrine of the Khārijite renegades of old who revolted against the Prophet's Companions on the very same grounds outline above and its target is the Muslim nation. Thereafter, the proponents of this ideology sough to read it into and weave it into the writings of Salafī scholars who are free and innocent of it, by trying to justify this devious ideology and their own activities by misquoting or misapplying their statements out of their contextual background. The leaders of these movements are motivated by worldly considerations that are then clothed and beautified with religious rhetoric and lofty slogans like the ones mentioned above. They recruit sentimental, emotional ignoramuses who are mostly young in age and foolish of mind who become foot soldiers for the cause. Their statements and declarations are full of anger, resentment, hatred, grievances about wealth, charges of takfir, calls for taking up arms and revolting against the authorities and so on.

The Above Doctrine is Alien to Islām and to the Salafī Way (Which is the Islam of the Prophet and His Companions)

This heretical doctrine is nowhere to be found in the Qurʾān, nowhere to be found in the Prophetic traditions – rather the revealed texts clash with it. It is not found with the Companions, rather it was found with those who made takfīr of them and waged war against them – and they were ignoramuses who did not understand the Qurʾān, motivated by the world, cloaked in beautified religious rhetoric. It is nowhere to be found with the Salaf, rather they refuted it. It is nowhere to be found in the writings of Imām Aḥmad or any well-known scholar from the era of the Salaf. It is not found in the writings of Ibn Taymiyyah, rather it is refuted extensively and in detail in his writings. It is nowhere to be found in the writings of any of his students. It is nowhere to be found in the works of Ibn ʿAbd al-Wahhāb and his offspring. Rather, they refuted individuals and groups who emerged with these Khārijite ideas in their times, those who tried to promote views which are exactly the same as those of Quṭb, Mawdūdī, al-Zawāhirī, Bin Lādin, Abū Muḥammad al-Maqdisī, Abū Qatādah and other Khārijites. It is nowhere to be found in the writings of contemporary Salafī scholars. It is an alien doctrine who true roots lie in a merger between modern European materialist philosophy combined with early Khārijite doctrine. Its proponents such as Abū Muḥammad al-Maqdisī tried to read this heretical Quṭbo-Mawdūdian Khārijite doctrine into the writings of Salafī scholars, and they are free and innocent of it. It only has one name: Khārijism.

Declarations of Khārijites to Be Understood Within the Above Framework

From the above, it should be clear that the inner core of this ideology is centred around the subject of ruling by other than Allāh’s law, on the basis of a purely political explanation of lā ilāha illallāh. Muslim rulers are accused of usurping the right of Allāh by not judging by Allāh’s law completely and in its entirety (100%) or by making themselves “lawgivers” alongside Allāh by ruling with laws they brought from themselves or from others. They are then pronounced as “ṭāghūts” (false deities) and judged with apostasy on the basis of perceived sins (which are not actual sins) but are matter permitted in the Sharīʿah, actual sins, or injustice and tyranny. The lands they rule over are then judged as lands of disbelief (dār kufr). As this applies to all contemporary Muslim rulers, then no land of Islām exists and no Islāmic jamāʿah (a true Muslim society) is in existence. This demands a reframing of jihād as a struggle (of insurgents and revolutionaries) against all existing structures of rule in Muslim lands. And this is claimed to be “the Prophetic methodology in calling to Allāh” and “actualisation of Tawḥīd”. In actual reality these people are referred to in the Prophetic traditions as “Dogs of Hellfire”, “the worst of creation” who “pass through Islām as an arrow passes through its prey”. Note: this page will be updated with new quotes so please bookmark and revisit from time to time.

Abu al-Aʿlā al-Mawdūdī

In 1940s he claimed most special meaning of Tawhid lies in ḥākimiyyah (lawgiving) and sulṭah (political authority). Presents the spring and foundation of all evil and corruption on Earth to be political in nature, in the form of rulers, dictators, social classes or political parties who assume political power and impose their laws upon subject.

This idea formed the fabric on top of which the 20th century Khārijite doctrine could be stitched and weaved. This was done by Sayyid Quṭb within two decades later.

Sayyid Quṭb

Sayyid Quṭb took the basic ideas of al-Mawdūdī and developed them into a fully developed doctrine coupled with a practical methodology. This became the idelogical springboard and fountain for all Takfīrī-Jihādī Khārijite factions in the 20th century. He accused all contemporary Muslim societies of pre-Islāmic society, denied the existence of an actual Islāmic society, accused all rulers, governments and societies of apostacy on account of their alleged ignorance of the meaning of the declaration of faith and called for general worldwide revolutions to topple the authorities.

Sayyid Quṭb

“And this important duty, the duty of instigating a Islāmic revolution is general, it is not restricted to one region exclusive to another. Rather, it is what Islām desires, and places it in front of its vision, that it should instigate a comprehensive revolution in all inhabited places. This is its greatest objective and its loftiest goal to which it turns its vision, except that it is absolutely mandatory for the Muslims or members of any Islāmic party to immediately embark upon their duty by instigating the urgent revolution, and striving to alter the structure of rule in their lands in which they live.”

Abū Muḥammad al-Maqdisī

“The brothers who nurtured us upon al-Ẓilāl, Milestones and other books of Sayyid Quṭb and his brother, and al-Mawdūdī with a nurturing during custodianship - I mean at the beginnings of guidance.”

His doctrinal nurturing (Takfīrī-Jihādī Khārijism) came from Quṭb and al-Mawdūdī. The various books and writings of al-Maqdisī are an elaboration of what is found in the books of these two thinkers of the foundations of the ideology of Khārijism.

Ayman al-Zawāhirī

“Rather, the battle taking place over time between the truth and falsehood did not revolve and does not revolve except around this foundational pillar from the creed of Islām: To whom belongs the right of judgement and legislation? To Allāh alone, the Sublime? Or to what is other than him from rivals and partners?”

This is the distortion of the Islamic creed as laid down by Quṭb and al-Mawdūdī.

Abū Muḥammad al-Maqdisī

“The entire world today is an abode of disbelief (dār kufr), the Muslims are weak therein. Their lands have been confiscated, occupied and usurped, either by external disbelievers from disbelievers from within who ally with the external disbelievers. And I do not make any exception to that, not even Makkah or Madīnah.”

Abū Qatādah

“We do not desire to fight America unless it attacks us, and begins the fight first. This is different to the fight against the apostate regimes in our lands, those against whom jihād is an individual obligation upon every single Muslim.”

Abū Qatādah

“From the angle of vengeful retribution, we must learn how not to fear blood, how to skilfully slaughter.”

Gave fatwas during 1990s permitting the slaughter of children and women of policemen and soldiers in Algeria.

ʿAbdullāh al-Rashūd

“Making jihād in the Lands of the Two Holy Sanctuaries is a greater obligation than fighting in Irāq.”

Abū Muṣʿāb al-Sūrī

He wrote a book revolving mostly around wealth, “The Responsibility of the People of Yemen (i.e. the Takfīrī Khārijites of al-Qaeda upon his ideology) Towards the Treasures of the Peninsula.” Meaning, plundering the wealth of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.

Abū Qatādah

“What enters into the description of the ‘harmful mosque (masjid ḍirār)’ to which this legislative description is applied are the mosques which have been erected by the false deities (the Muslim rulers) so that their names can be remembered in them and can be named. These mosques carry many of the conceptual elements of ‘harm’. From them is that they are built out of show and fame, the wealth used to build them is from what has been plundered (stolen) by those false deities and some of it is from usury.”

Meaning that mosques paid for and maintained by Muslim governments are but manifestations of hypocrisy and one should not pray in them. The Khārijites withdraw themselves from Muslim societies and places of worship out of hate and resentment towards them built upon a corrupt, distorted, alien creed.

Fāris al-Zaḥrānī

“O people, this state (Saudi) is closer to falling than remaining. And I am certain that the (time of) them being planed (to the ground) has come near. Thus, whoever amongst you is to execute (hang) one of them, or be the puller (of the rope), then let him begin first with the Committee of Major Agents (ʿumalā) (meaning, scholars, ʿulamā). Let one of you sharpen his blade and let him punish the tāghūts (false deities). Let him skin him (alive) and slaughter him, a befitting recompense. And the recompense for a deed is with its like.”

Reminds you of the terrorism of the Azāriqah, an early Khārijite sect (see here). Their most intense hatred is reserved for the Salafī scholars, because they are the greatest of what stands between them and their perverted goals which are based on their perverted ideology.

Abu Baṣīr Mustafā Ḥalīmah

He speaks of the difficulties encounted by the groups allegedly “working for Islām” (he means Khārijites) and from them is that they are unable to fight the “internal enemy” whose disbelief is more severe. He says, “They are unable to find a Syrian who will fight another Syrian, an Egyptian who will fight another Egyptian, a Palestinian who will fight another Palestinian, even if this other is greater in disbelief than the Jews and Christians, and whose harm upon the servants and the land is greater than the harm of the Jews and Christians.”

Meaning that currently the Khārijites are unable to find Syrians, Egyptians and Palestinians who - upon the necessities of the Khārijite doctrine - are willing to kill their fellow countrymen who do not agree with their views.

Abū Dujānah al-Shāmī

“The rulers are apostates, no one is excused for being ignorant about their condition, due to the apparentness of their apostasy, and the clarity of their open disbelief. So how can their aiders and supporters [let alone the common folk] be excused with ignorance whilst their condition is apparent to the eyes.”

In his book “Rulings Pertaining to the Armies and Police”. The Khārijites consider employees of government institutions that require loyalty, support and non-opposition as apostates. In the above quote he says no one is allowed to claim ignorance for not knowing the rulers are apostates - this essentially means that every single person who does not hold this view is an apostate, and thus a legitimate target for the Khārijites.

Abu al-Aʿlā al-Mawdūdī

Falsely claimed that the Prophets came to free people from political, social and economic slavery and that they came to established social justice in order to free mankind. He portrayed the Prophets as revolutionaries engaged in struggles with despots and tyrants and framed jihād within this context.

Sayyid Quṭb

In his Qurʾān commentary claims that the mosques of the Muslims have become as the worshipping places of the times of pre-Islamic ignorance (jāhiliyyah) because the society itself has reverted to jāhiliyyah.

Ayman al-Zawāhirī

“Sayyid Quṭb is the one who laid down the constitution of the Jihādists in his dynamite book ‘Milestones’. Sayyid is the source of this fundamental revival. His book ‘Social Justice in Islām’ is considered from the most important intellectual and ideological contribution to fundamentalist orientations. His ideology was the initial spark in kindling the Islāmic revolution against the internal and external enemies of Islām.”

Muḥammad Quṭb

“Certainly, the matter requires that the people be called afresh to Islām. Not so because they – in this time – refuse to say with their mouths, ‘Lā ilāha ilallāha Muḥammad Rasūlullāh,’ as the people use to refuse to say it in the [period of the] very first strangeness. But [more so] because – in this time – they reject the principle requirement of ‘Lā ilāha ilallāha’ and that is judging to the Shariʿah of Allāh”

This is generalised takfīr of people by claiming they have rejected what he clams is the priniciple requirement of the declaration faith – the politically charged Khārijite interpretation that is.

Abū Muḥammad al-Maqdisī

“This great Tawḥīd - Tawḥid al-Ḥākimiyyah – which we revolve around and which is the central axis of the call of the Prophets and Messengers and the foundation of the religion, in spite of every arrogant one [who thinks otherwise].”

Abū Muḥammad al-Maqdisī

“A note about the principle: ‘The foundation with respect to the armies of the false deities (rulers) and their supporters is one of disbelief’ – there is nothing at fault with it.”

Abū Muḥammad al-Maqdisī

Passed judgement that raising and flying the flag of Muslim nations constitutes disbelief and apostasy and whoever does so is to be counted among the ranks of the disbelievers and pagans and treated as one at war on the battlefield. This is because to him this is a clear, open sign of allegiance to the false deities (rulers).

Abu Baṣīr Mustafā Ḥalīmah

“Rather, we would not be swerving from the truth if we were to say: They [the Muslim rulers] have excelled over the rulers of the Jews in many traits of disbelief, rejection and oppression such that it would make withholding from their excommunication to be a great crime with respect to the right of the religion of Allāh and the right of the Muslim nation.”

ʿAbd al-Qādir ʿAbd al-Azīz (Sayyid Faḍl)

“Fighting the apostate rulers has priority over fighting Jews and Christians” and from the reasons he gives is “They are apostates” and “They are in proximity to the Muslims.”

Abū Muḥammad al-Maqdisī

“We believe that when a scholar gives the pledge of allegiance to a legislating ṭāghūt or a disbelieving ruler, giving him his hand (to pledge allegiance), to support him with his heart, to aid him, ally with him and revolves around him in his fatwā (religious verdict), then he is a kāfir, murtad (disbeliever, apostate).”

This is generalised takfīr of the scholars of the Muslims in the various lands, and they do not grant excuse because the matter of the disbelief of the rulers is a matter they consider to be known by necessity, and scholars, of all people, cannot be ignorant of this.

Muḥammad Khalīl al-Ḥakayma

Muhammad Khalil al-Ḥakayma Under the pseudonym of “Abū Bakr al-Nāji”, authored “Idārat al-Tawaḥḥush” (“Managing Brutality”) - which is a template for a brutal form of terrorism). This was spread amongst followers of al-Qaeda and more recently ISIS. Al-Ḥakayma (killed in 2009) was a resident of Irān and worked in the broadcasting industry. Many of the terrorist incidents that took place in Saudi Arabia targeting oil refineries and other places were inspired by this book. Al-Qaeda (Khārijites) are used by Iran in places like Afghanistan, Irāq and Yemen for their political goals whilst the Khārijites in turn are pleased with such tactical support to further their own goals.

Abū Muḥammad al-Maqdisī

“Those people do not understand except the logic of slaughter, killing and blood, which is from the religion. Nothing will repel them from their misguidance and oppression except this logic in an open manner until those behind them are put into a frightened panic.”

Fāris al-Zaḥrānī

“Those leaders - without exception - in their personal fields, enjoy lavish palaces, through external reserves (funds), by plundering the Islāmic societies in the form of commissions they take.”

Grieved about how rulers dispose of wealth.

Ayman al-Ẓawāhirī

“The killing of this girl without intent has harmed us, but what should our strategy be, we must make jihād against the governments that fight the legislation of Allāh and who ally with His enemies. We have warned individuals from these societies many times before, especially after the attack upon the Interior Minister, Hasan al-Ulfī, that they should keep away from the main establishments of the governmental organisations and their residences, and the routes of their travel. The jihād cannot be stopped.”

He is referring to 'collateral damage' wherein women and children are killed when they target government institutions and buildings with bombings. He is basically saying we cannot stop the 'jihād' for fear of collateral damage.

Abū Muḥammad al-Maqdisī

Would steal from Muslims he considered apostates, such as policemen and those working for authorities and foreign non-Muslim Expats. He used to do this in Kuwait and Jordan and considered this a lawful means of acquiring livelihood.

The Salafī Imām Ḥarb bin Ismāʿīl al-Kirmānī (180H) said: “And they are thieves, highway-robbers, we have known them with [such practice].”

Abu al-Aʿlā al-Mawdūdī

“Our call to all the people of the Earth is to initiate a generalised revolution against the foundations of current rule (in all places), that which the sinful, false deities (ṭawāghīt, fajarah), those who have filled the Earth with corruption. And that this ideological and knowledge-based leadership is snatched from their hands.”

Sayyid Quṭb

“The whole of mankind, including those who repeat from the minarets, in the eastern and western parts of the world, the words ‘Lā ilāha illallāha’, without any [consideration of] meaning or reality, then they are the most sinful of people and will be the most severely punished on the day of Judgement because they have apostatised by turning to the worship of the servants (of Allāh).”

Sayyid Quṭb

“Today we are in Jāhiliyyah, like that which was prevalent at the dawn of Islām, in fact more oppressive (i.e. severe). Everything around us is Jāhiliyyah…” And also “This society in which we live is not a Muslim society.” And also “Indeed the position of Islām towards these societies of Ignorance (muj’tamāt al-jāhiliyyah) can be defined in a single expression: It (Islām) refuses to acknowledge the Islām or the legal validity (sharʿiyyatihā) of every single one of these societies…”

Abū Muḥammad al-Maqdisī

“The disbelief of these governments, whether original disbelief or dibelief through apostacy is more evil than that of the Jews and Christians.”

Abū Muḥammad al-Maqdisī

“For that reason we are not shy in applying the judgement of disbelief and apostasy upon the rulers unrestrictedly. Rather, we openly announce it and do not hide it. We boast about it and call to it in our books, lessons and lectures. We shout it aloud in every gathering and valley. We praise Allāh who has guided us and given us insight through it, for it is our religion by which we worship.”

Abū Muḥammad al-Maqdisī

“We believe that when the scholar pledges allegiance to the legislating false deity (al-ṭāghūt al-musharriʿ) or the disbelieving ruler, giving him his hand in agreement, and the fruit of his heart [in obedience], or aided him, allied with him and gave verdicts that tend to wherever the [ruler] tends, that he is a disbeliever, apostate.”

Usāmah bin Lādin

Muṣtafā Wafā, General Trustee of the Council for Islamic Research for the Commitee of Major Scholars of al-Azhar (Egypt) is cited as saying, “The words used by Bin Lāden in his speech confirms that he is affected a great deal by the books of Sayyid Quṭb and the deceased Abū Aʿlā Mawdūdī. He conveys the thoughts of Sayyid Quṭb in his book, ‘Milestones’, in which he divided the world into Muslim, disbeliever and sinner, or into the faithful society and the society of (pre-Islāmic) ignorance. Bin Lāden tried to to differ from the group of the Muslim Brotherhood (al-Ikhwān) by bringing out the ideology of Sayyid Quṭb in a practical way. Just as he also studied well the books of Abū Aʿlā Mawdūdī, especially, the ‘The Four Terms’. And these books specifically were the primary, chief movers behind the Islāmic activism of the youth of the various Islāmic parties in the 1970s during the previous century. And I think that Bin Lāden was amongst those who was politicised (into activism) during this era.”

Fāris al-Zaḥrānī

“You see the open disbelief of these regimes and states that rule over you... the tyrants did not even leave Islām for you, they are fighting us because of our religion... I call upon them to unite and revolt against these tyrants.”

Abū Qatādah

“The obligation of making jihād against these factions [Muslims employed in government institutions], not allying with them or supporting them. When it is clear to us that these are factions of apostasy, it is obligatory upon the Muslims to make jihād of defence against them... its ruling is an individual obligation (farḍ ʿayn).”

Muḥammad al-ʿArīfī

On a satellite channel program he was complaining about the rulers how they announce salary increases for government employees and keep millions in foreign banks.

The issue again is one of wealth to the Khārijites.

Abū Muḥammad al-Maqdisī

“As for the delegated (imāms) of the false deities (the Muslim rulers), then they are either one who is allied with them and is thus like their soldiers or military in aid of them, or one who permits their democracy, defending them, supporting their polytheism. We do not hold (it permissible) to pray behind them, because they are from them, they are not from amongst us. Rather, we forbid it and order the one who prayed behind them to repeat their prayer.”

Meaning, imāms of mosques (and similar employees of governments) are apostates like the rulers, thus prayer behind them is invalid.

Abū Muṣʿāb al-Sūrī

“The wealth of the peninsula is right in front of you, the wealth of the disbelievers from the occupiers (he means foreign expat workers within this) and apostates (he means Muslims)... If you took from the excesses of this wealth, you would be sufficed and the people of Jihād would be sufficed.”

Ayman al-Ẓawāhirī

In a treatise he states that fighting the ruler and those factions who are employed by him, at his service, and support him (army, police etc.) are to be fought because he argues this is defensive fighting which comes first, that the apostate deserves more severe punishment than the original disbeliever and because they are the “near enemy”.

Abū Muḥammad al-Maqdisī

“The disbelief of these governments, irrespective of whether their disbelief is original or is the disbelief of apostasy, then it is more evil than the disbelief of the Jews and Christians.”

Abū Qatādah

“We believe that fighting the factions of apostasy has precedence over fighting others from the polytheists and hypocrites for three reasons: They are closer to us than others [near enemy]; that the apostate is more worthy of being fought than the original disbeliever; that fighting against them is from the angle of fighting in defence.”

That is to say, the argument of 'pre-emptive' self-defence justifies killing the 'factions of apostasy' which include government employees.